[Jason Topp]

Let me make a comment about the courses (as this is a GCA forum):  Both were surprisingly similar in total yardage, with a difference of only 33 yards. Merion played at 6,996 yds with an additional 1,624 yds of Green to Tee distance, while Muirfield played at 7,192 yds, and adding approximately 1,461 yds for getting from greens to tees. 

Bill - how do you measure green to tee yardage?  That might be an interesting stat to publish for those of us that want to see courses designed to encourage walking.  I am also interested because I am doing a hundred hole hike in a few weeks on a course I know is not the easiest walk.

[Bill_Yates]

Jason - To measure the Green to Tee distance, simply use a wheel or pace off the distance from the center of the green of one hole to the center of the most frequently used tee of the next hole.  At most courses I ask them to tell me which tees are the most frequently used and I also ask what the percentage of cart use is. 

If cart use is high, which it almost always is, when doing the measurement, I follow the path a player would use when playing from a cart. Typically that is walking from the center of the green to the parked cart, driving along the cart path to the parking spot at the next tee, then walking to the center of that tee.  In many cases when walkers are on a course with riders they will take shortcuts, in these cases I always default to the worst case (following the cart path).  However, if the course is primarily a walking course, I follow the walker's  path.   

[Jason Topp]

I tried measuring as the crow flies from green center to tee marker on two courses I know well - one of which I think of as a long walk and one I think of as a short walk and was surprised that the distance was not greater.  The long walk is 6700 yards plus 1672 yards green to tee for a total of 8,372 yards the short walk was 6600 yards with 1210 yards of green to tee walking for a total of 7822 yards.  Terrain is a bit of an additional difference but I would have thought the difference would have been more than 550 yards which would be less than 7 minutes walking at my normal pace of about 20 minutes per mile.

I think walking up a hill after 18 green is the biggest factor in making one walk seem longer.

[David_Elvins]

Considering Bill studies this stuff and makes a living doing so, I am guessing he knows what he is writing about.

+1. Of course, this same group has another thread where a bunch of 15 handicaps are opining on what Tiger Woods needs to do to win a major, so I'm not sure how much I expect anyone to care about Bill's experience...

Boys,

No harm in thinking for yourself.  If you did you would realise that there is no logic behind a 10min tee spacing creating a faster pace of play than an 11 minute tee spacing.  Do you really think that players would play slower if they had teed off with an eleven minute spacing? 

[David_Elvins]

David - My comment was that the "proper" interval was chosen.  At Muirfield, with a more free-flowing sequence of holes, the 10-minute interval was the proper interval for twosomes on Sunday, and at Merion with it's many short par 4's and long par 3's, an 11-minute interval was the proper one for twosome Sunday play.

Thanks for the response Bill, I do enjoy your contributions to pace of play on this board.  But it seems that it is the "free flowing sequence of holes" that was a contributing factor to Round 4 at Muirfield being 2 hours faster than round 3 at Merion, not the reduced space between tee times.  

[Jason Topp]

Boys,

No harm in thinking for yourself.  If you did you would realise that there is no logic behind a 10min tee spacing creating a faster pace of play than an 11 minute tee spacing.  Do you really think that players would play slower if they had teed off with an eleven minute spacing? 

[/quote]

I agree there is no harm in thinking for yourself but spouting off with ideas without data results in conclusions such as "The world is flat" and "the Sun revolves around the earth."  Such conjecture is useless if you want to address the issue.

[Jason Topp]

I admired the work of a club employee today who dealt with a group of new members playing slowly.  He parked a cart next to the third green and when the group walked by he explained that he was monitoring the pace of play of some high school girls playing two groups behind the slow group. 

We did not wait again and our five ball played nine holes in two hours after the first two holes took 40 minutes. 

The approach was so much more effective than admonishing the group which would have left them pissed at the shop and pissed at us for placing a call into the shop.  I am guessing the group will not create a slow play issue again and I look forward to playing with those guys soon.

[David_Elvins]

I agree there is no harm in thinking for yourself but spouting off with ideas without data results in conclusions such as "The world is flat" and "the Sun revolves around the earth."  Such conjecture is useless if you want to address the issue.

Jason,

I have the data:
US Open Round 3:
11 minute spacing, 5h45m pace of play

The Open Round 4:
10 minute spacing, 3h45m pace of play

I don't believe that one can infer from this data that the major factor that influenced pace of play at the Open compared to the US Open was "The proper spacing between groups, giving them room to move and make a few mistakes".  All other things being equal, how does teeing off at a shorter interval allow more time for players to make a few mistakes?  Do you really think I am unqualified to make this assessment?  It is primary school maths...

[DMoriarty]

Please keep in mind that one organization was not right and one was not wrong. Both the R&A and the USGA thoughtfully scheduled and managed play by adapting to the unique need of the course.  Interestingly, that's precisely what every course needs to do to win the "slow play" battle.

Wait . . . the USGA had 5:45 minute rounds on Saturday, and we should keep in mind no one side was wrong?   5:45 sounds like an epic fail to me.    Surely it is not unrelated to the USGA setup.  

[Mark Pearce]

For the sake of completeness it's worth pointing out that whilst the gap between most groups at the Open was 10 minutes every 6th (I think) group had a 15 minute gap.

[David_Elvins]

For the sake of completeness it's worth pointing out that whilst the gap between most groups at the Open was 10 minutes every 6th (I think) group had a 15 minute gap.

Thanks Mark. I stand corrected.

[Joe Bausch]

For the sake of completeness it's worth pointing out that whilst the gap between most groups at the Open was 10 minutes every 6th (I think) group had a 15 minute gap.

The 15 minute gap was not consistent:

http://www.sbnation.com/golf/2013/7/21/4541452/2013-british-open-tee-times-sunday-final-round

[Mark Pearce]

For the sake of completeness it's worth pointing out that whilst the gap between most groups at the Open was 10 minutes every 6th (I think) group had a 15 minute gap.

The 15 minute gap was not consistent:

http://www.sbnation.com/golf/2013/7/21/4541452/2013-british-open-tee-times-sunday-final-round

Looks like every 9th tee time but with one after the 8th.

[Brent Hutto]

We all have our own prejudices. I understand and tend to agree with the work being done to study factors like course layout (physical environment), tee time spacing (policy) and other factors within the control of those running the tournament. But in the end my money is always on the social environment and perceived social norms as the dominant influence in human behavior. And the only realistic type of social influence that can be put on the entire field of a major championship is a very real sense of consequences for playing slowly. Which I would argue was more successfully created by R&A at the Open than by USGA at their US Open.

In my work life I deal with people trying to figure out how to produce environments more conducive to physical activity (and to a lesser extent healthy eating behaviors). The emphasis is very much on the "built environment" nowadays with a secondary emphasis on law, regulations, zoning and other things that can be modified at the public policy level. But in the end, that stuff amounts to very little because the social environment trumps all.

[JMEvensky]

All the players in the US/British Opens have the same level of skill.

How analagous is this discussion to a tee sheet filled with players of all different skill levels?

[Garland Bayley]

I agree there is no harm in thinking for yourself but spouting off with ideas without data results in conclusions such as "The world is flat" and "the Sun revolves around the earth."  Such conjecture is useless if you want to address the issue.

Data has a great capacity to be abused. Therefore, sometimes spouting off with data is just spouting off too.
The people that concluded the world is flat and concluded the sun revolves around the earth had data too.

[Patrick_Mucci]

One player penalized a stroke will have more effect than every commercial that will ever run from now until the heat death of the universe.

To paraphrase an old saw, once you've got 'em by the scorecards their hearts and minds will follow.

Brent,

You are so right.

Threats without enforcement are meaningless.

Penalize and they will accelerate.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()